*** F5 December 2014 Exam was.. Instant Poll and comments ***

You got it right 😉 what about questions 3 and 5!

For D we had 30 contribution per labor hour, so produce all 400 units which takes 800 hours. We had 2160-800 hours left, the second place went to A with contribution per labor hour of 7.6, some of units were produced as well

Q4:

Perspectives:

Financial performance
Internal
Customer
Innovation & development

No idea what they wanted to hear in terms of targets and measures and reasons. I wrote 2 pages. I hope some of it makes sense.

Q5:

A 0.25 – $10
B 0.6 – $4 or $3?
C 0.5 – $3 or $4?
Total: 1.35 kg, $17

Mix: take actual kg and see how they would be allocated in standard mix
(/1.35 * 0.25, /1.35 * 0.6, /1.35 * 0.5). This gives variances that add up
to 0. Multiply these variances by the std cost (x10, x4, x3).

Yield: 160,000? units produced * 1.35: how much it should have taken. Compare with kg actually kg used: multiply by standard cost per kg (17/1.35 = $12.60)

Yield (alternative): how many units should actual kg have produced: xxx – number of units produced. Multiply by standard cost ($17)

Unfortunately, I think I got this calculation wrong. My mix was favourable
and my yield as well. I think mix by around 4000 and yield by 28000 or so.
But I think this is wrong.

Part 2: mix was adverse, yield was favourable, which suggests higher quality input was used (more expense, less cheaper input)

I guess this means that explanation that sales volume change was caused by quality does not make sense.

@emo777 said:
Did you have feedforward control?

I think that’s correct because the thing they predicted hasn’t actually happened yet. So they made a change before it happened, which I think is feed forward.

Yeap, with this one you messed a little bit, but i see your ideas. Yield was fav, as actual 136000 was higher than budgeted 134400. Consideting our comments on sales manager, i agree, cause customers value quality, and it was enturely his fault that he could not increase sales

@ahsen22 said:
Anyone remember the answer of 3Es it is 3,2,1 !?

I don’t know. I struggled with this one.

I remember one was about reducing some expenses by 5% or so. I guess this is economy, but I’m not sure.

One was about getting people to work 6.2 instead of 6 days. I guess this is efficiency (income-output)? Or is this economy?

And one was to make customers happier or something like that. I think this is effectiveness: doing what you’re supposed to do.

Same here some of them were exact copies

Anyone knows the answer of environmental accounting ?

@ahsen22 said:
Anyone knows the answer of environmental accounting ?

Statement 1: the majority of environmental costs are already in accounting systems but they are hidden.

Statement 2: input/output analysis includes .., system, ..

Statement 2 applies to material flow accounting, so is wrong.

I’m not sure about statement 1. If it said “some” instead of “the majority” it would definitely be correct. But are the majority of environment costs included? What do you think? I think it’s correct but I’m not sure.

how do you all even remember all this.

I had exactly the same answers. And i have choose products D and B. Hope everything will be ok

On relevant costing question:
– factory o/h costs are listed separate to Admin o/h costs, and are allocated to labour hrs. So assumed factory costs to be variable (electricity, eqpt maintenance etc) and included $1.50 per labour hour. Also included super’s OT but not the 1.50 per hour for his regular pay which is a sunk cost.
– the wood is in continuing use but there isn’t enough to do the extra order as well as regular production in the time frame given for the order. They’re short by 30 sq m so they have to buy that at the immediate price of 8.50. The other 20 sq m will be replenished in their regular order.
– fabric is at replacement cost
– skilled labour 50 hrs at OT rates, 150 hrs sunk cost
– semi-skilled labour at the agency rate of $14/hr rather than OT rate of $16/hr for reg employees (lower rate is relevant unless there is some reason given that they must use their own employees, like union agreement)
– gen admin costs assumed budgeted for regular production and not relevant